When my parents brought home the little bundle of joy that was my baby sister, my first thought was "I'm going to make a gamer out of you!" Okay, so my first thought was probably something more like "Aw she's so cute and tiny!", but the gamer thing was definitely a close second. And make her a gamer I did. I introduced her to a lot of the classics with their "bad graphics", and turned her into a huge Nintendo fan. She even steals Yoshi from me whenever we play Mario Kart, the little brat.

So much of her taste in games has been influenced by me, that she did something that utterly surprised me today. While we were waiting in line to play the Mario Kart 8 demo at Best Buy, she grabbed a flyer for Animal Crossing: New Leaf and said "I want this game."

Not the most shock-inducing sentence, I know, but it was to me. You see, I've never bought an Animal Crossing game. I played the Gamecube one at a friend's house once, but that was enough for me. Not that I have any hate for Animal Crossing, but it's just not my type of game. Stories are why I play games, so games like Animal Crossing or Minecraft that are centered around wandering around in and customizing a world never really appealed to me. I like games that have a clear end in sight, and therefore most of the games I show my sister have that as well.

Can you PLEASE just do the next story mission now?

It makes sense that she would be interested in Animal Crossing, however. She loves Minecraft and LittleBig Planet. She changes her Mii's hairstyle more often than she does her own. Running around and catching new Pokemon is more appealing to her than getting all the gym badges. She plays games to explore and well, play. At some point she grew into her own gamer...and her own person. Which is fine by me. As long as she's enjoying herself.

Still, it makes me wonder. How do you guys prefer to play? Are you goal-oriented and story-driven? Or do you just like to mess around? Let me know, I'm curious to see how you respond.

Did anyone else actually enjoy summer reading? I remember that being the highlight of my summer homework as a kid. The essays and book reports that followed, not so much, but the books themselves were great. Even in college, I usually enjoyed the classes in which we would discuss the assigned readings. Maybe I’m just a big ol’ nerd, but there was something about breaking down and comparing interpretations and symbolisms that made for a fun class.

I Don&#Array;t Think Sticker Books Are On The Approved Reading List, Mario.

Now it’s my sister’s turn to run the gauntlet of compulsory education, and she just brought home her summer reading list. This, in addition to my recent completion of Bioshock Infinite, raised a question in my mind: Will there ever be a time where games are broken down and discussed in the classroom? When bored children of the future are forced to study the socities of the late 20th/early 21st century, will the games we played growing up be used as a lens by which the ideals of our culture are revealed?

As much as I’d like gaming to be recognized as an art form, I have to say no. This is because video games are rarely seen as anything more than entertainment in our society. No matter how much gaming has transcended the label of being a “geeky” pastime, it is still considered as nothing more than a hobby.

Every once in a while, a game comes around that makes people talk. And I mean really talk. Not just about gameplay or graphics, but concepts. Mass Effect 3, for all the flak you might give its ending, is a great example of this. As a series, the Mass Effect games present the idea of cycles. Creators are undone by their creations, once-great heroes are forgotten by those that begged to be saved, and enemies become allies and go back to being enemies. And, of course, the scheduled appearance of the reapers ends life on a galactic scale and returns it to a primitive state that it may one day rise again. The ending of the game is the culmination of this, where players can choose to either end the cycle altogether or use it to their own advantage. Many defenders of the ending use this thematic thread to explain why the endings perfectly wrap up the trilogy. Their opposition, however, points out that the ending fails in a literary sense. Characters and explanations are thrown in at the last minute and plot holes abound. Isn’t this the sort of debate that has formed around many a great novel? So why can’t video games get the distinction of being considered in an academic setting?

I Actually Liked the Ending, Wanna Fight About It?

To put it simply, titles like Mass Effect or Bioshock are the exception to the rule. When the average person talks about video games, the first thought that comes to his/her mind would most likely be Mario or Pac-Man. Fun games, but hardly food for thought. Even among the more “mature” well-known games, such as Call of Duty or Grand Theft Auto, things such as theme and symbolism are rarely present. The emphasis is on gameplay, and--as is the case with more and more AAA games these days--throwing in some kind of online multiplayer. When these games are put into the public eye, it happens in one of two ways. The first is through advertising. And what is an advertising team going to focus on? The deep, involved characters and philosophically-charged plot? Or the variety of sick weapons and different modes in which you can blow up your friends with those weapons? If you chose the more violent-sounding second option, you are correct. Which leads to the second way we often see video games in the public eye: as scapegoats to some act of violence. Of course its going to be hard for people to see games as deep works of art when they are shown a report confirming a school shooter as a Call of Duty fan and then a commercial for Call of Duty where the player is ripping through enemies with an automatic weapon. Yet violent games like CoD make sales. Record setting sales, in fact. Not that I have a problem with violence in games, mind you. But with violence increasingly becoming the thing games are known for, it gets harder to draw attention to a game that sends a message or provokes thought.

Gaming is a hobby, as is reading. I grew up with both. Both can be fun, both can be challenging, and both have caused my to deeply think about certain issues. When I went to school, however, I found that one was considered a serious activity that expanded my mind and the other a silly pastime. Even though gaming has grown up since the ol’ SNES days, that opinion persists. Even though I’ve interacted with deep characters like Elizabeth and Andrew Ryan, even though my Shepard had a hero’s journey worthy of any epic poem, society doesn’t seem ready to admit that gaming is more than stomping on turtles and shooting your friends. Hopefully we well be one day, because I would love to see children being assigned to play Mass Effect for homework. That would be pretty badass.

I had to dust off the ol’ Merriam Webster to find those. They are the definitions of ‘entitled’ and ‘entitlement’, respectively. Why did I do that? Because something about the whole ‘Retake Mass Effect’ thing just pisses me off.

If you’re reading an IGN blog, I’m sure you’re aware of Retake Mass Effect. But, just in case you’ve been in a coma for the past few weeks, I’ll quickly recap. It started with people who were unhappy with the ending of Mass Effect 3, the last in the trilogy of Bioware’s epic sci-fi RPG. This unhappiness was first expressed in the usual ways: Metacritic bombings, silly youtube videos, and nasty comments on various gaming sites. But then it got bigger. Someone had the idea to start a charity to raise awareness for the displeasure with the ending, the proceeds going to Child’s Play. The point of the donations was to show that the rage about the ending wasn’t rage. It was the legitimate concern of mature fans who were not entitled kids. This quickly gained momentum, garnering media attention and raking in the dollars. Eventually, it grew too big to ignore. Bioware gave in, and some kind of alteration of the ending is now in the works. Retake Mass Effect has now stopped collecting donations at the request of Child’s Play.

So, case closed, right? Not quite. To explain why, I’ll have to take you back to those definitions I presented. Go ahead and read them again. Now, consider one of the claims made by Retake Mass Effect: They are not acting out of a sense of entitlement. But let’s look at their list of demands, taken from their site:

* A more complete explanation of the story events

* An explaination of the outcome of the decisions made, especially with regard to the planets, races, and companions detailed throughout the series

* A heroic ending which provides a better sense of accomplishment

See the problem? Nothing on this list is a game-breaking bug or error. There’s nothing that would make one consider the product as faulty and therefore warrant a second look by the maker. So really, the things listed here are solely for the purpose of a greater sense of personal satisfaction, i.e. a privilege. The re-takers believe that they deserve the privilege of an alternate ending. On what grounds do they have the authority to receive this privilege? Well, because they got a lot of people and money together. Basically, they’re furnishing themselves with the grounds to seek a new ending. That’s entitlement, by definition. But the fact that they’re donating money to charity shows that they’re nice, right? They’re not a group of whiners. Well no, they’re not whiners, but donating also doesn’t really change anything. As you can see there’s nothing about giving money to charity involved in the meaning of entitlement. The belief that they deserve their requests be fulfilled and the fact that they give themselves the right to demand it, by definition, makes them entitled.

But that’s not even the real problem. After all, Retake Mass Effect is over, right? They made a big statement, and Bioware listened. That’s their victory, and therefore it should be the end. Unfortunately, it’s not. Check out a quote from the post that ended the Retake Mass Effect fundraising:

"Retake Mass Effect is not over by any means; Dr. Myzuka's statement was welcome, but did not directly address our concerns. You have been heard. Now it is time to make sure they get the details right "

They’ll be back. If the alternate ending doesn’t live up to their standards, we’ll see this whole thing happen again. Furthermore, they not only have the grounds to demand a new ending, but now they’re claiming the right to nit-pick the details? How is this not entitlement!?

What worries me is how easily this thing snowballed. Mass Effect was the first game of its kind, and Bioware is really the first developer of its kind. That kind being the one that takes fan feedback and makes it a vital part of the development process. As we just saw, fans tend to get entitled when given that kind of power. And, as we just saw, Bioware rolled over and let it happen. Will fans now expect to be able to have this kind of say again? What games could be the next targets of a retake effort? “Retake Assassin’s Creed: We Didn’t Like The Forest Sections, Give Us More Cities”? “Retake Zelda: We Want Less Dungeons and More Epona”? “Retake Final Fantasy: Bring Back the Turn Based Battles”?

Say what you want about the ending to Mass Effect 3. I’m more concerned about the precedent this whole fiasco has set for the industry as a whole. Not that listening to fan feedback is bad. But there’s a difference between accepting feedback and giving in to demands. This was definitely an example of the latter. Hopefully, Bioware will deliver a satisfying alternate ending and things will just blow over. If not, though, be ready. The re-takers, like Reapers, wait in the darkness. And if they aren’t satisfied then they, again like Reapers, will proceed to set upon all we hold dear and harvest it to fit their own desires. That or, you know, try to get Naughty Dog to add blood in Uncharted to give it that promised sense of realism. I’m actually not sure which one’s worse...